Malicious Comments and Intent

Shockingly, this will turn out to be the largest posting. The Editors of CNET and ZDNET for years have publicly maligned Recording Artists that spoke out about Media Piracy.

WE HAVE OVER ONE HUNDRED SAMPLES DREDGED FROM THE CNET / ZDNET PAST!

Do not forget that CNET and ZDNET were Billion Dollar Corporations in in the Napster Days!

Publicly writing malicious articles about rights holders such as Dr. Dre and Metallica.

CNET and ZDNET led the world in rebellion against Metallica and Dr Dre during the Napster years. Shouldn't this be an article SUPPORTIVE of Bono now that Sumner Redstone and CBS own CNET? And have for two years? LimeWire and the other P2P software downloads were still a gold mine for CNET and they obviously were not ready to let the income and page views just go away!

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-10423544-261.html

CLICK ON ANY IMAGE FOR FULL SCREEN VIEW
Original LimeWire CNET Download page from that Very Week!

Courtesy of the "Internet Wayback Machine"

http://web.archive.org/web/20100106040317/http://download.cnet.com/limewire/
CLICK ON ANY IMAGE TO ENLARGE TO FULL SCREEN SIZE

Look at these lead "Teaser Line: for an MP3 Insider Story;

"MP3 Insider: Are Anti-Napster Musicians Selling Out"

"Musicians of all shapes and sizes have spoken out against Napster, but some fans smell a rat."

http://web.archive.org/web/20000510145417/http://www.cnet.com/consumerelectronics/0-3622.html?

http://web.archive.org/web/20000621092012/http://music.cnet.com/music/0-1652424-7-1814584.html?
"The latest: Metallica and Dr. Dre have joined the growing list of people who want to see Napster's head on a platter, alleging that college students are robbing them by downloading their copyrighted songs for free." "Which they are."

This CNET Senior Editor admits that the Napster Software is being used to procure copyrighted music for free.

QUOTE: "Which they are", Yet gives a LIVE inline link right at the very beginning DIRECTLY to the Napster software download page!

Then the Same CNET Senior Editor Goes on to say:

QUOTE: " And the way the law stands now, the responsibility for copyright infringement falls upon the person whose computer is uploading songs to other Napster users."

Which is wrong, even for the time! The Senior Editor is basically telling readers to download to your hearts content. Then the title "Senior Editor" makes readers trust the advice even more!

Yet, this Senior Editor goes on to Maliciously remark;

"And why is Metallica going after its fans when we all know the band is living in castles and bathing in champagne?"

The FULL Article on the next page is even MORE Malicious!

"Britney Spears Breast Augmentation" Comment Links Directly to THIS Page:

http://web.archive.org/web/20010609191229/http://www.estronaut.com/a/Breast_Implant_Augmentation_Enlargement_Teen.htm

The "Master of Puppets" link is still live and identical

http://www.satlink.com/usuarios/d/delamer/metallica/master.htm

What was the intent of CNET writers constantly Bashing the Musicians going after Napster? Breeding hate amongst the readers? Could it be what appears on the BOTTOM half of this page?

The Link from "Artists Sound off about Napster goes Here:

http://web.archive.org/web/200012160137/http://mi2n.com/press.php3?press_nb=7856

And WHY did the editors give this a RED ARROW DOWN?

The "MP3 File Sharing Software downloads"were a HUGE DRAW to a company losing literally tens of millions of dollars a year. Facing the prospect of many other Dot Coms at the time. Piracy Software and Tutorials brought tremendous traffic.

If "Metallica" and the "RIAA" succeeded, the traffic would have evaporated. No Music Center, No reader traffic, no jobs.

http://classic-web.archive.org/web/20000621000901/music.zdnet.com/


Malicious Comments and Intent

Metallic and Dr Dre Comments by Editorial Writers That are Malicious

http://replay.web.archive.org/20010405121522/http://cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-2066662.html

RIAA asks judge to pull all major-label songs off Napster

By John Borland

Staff Writer, CNET News.com

June 13, 2000, 12:35 p.m. PT

Eager to get at the people who are pirating their songs, a few artists have tried creative means of closing the tap. Hard-rock band Metallica and rapper Dr. Dre have trolled the service for people making their songs available online and have submitted hundreds of thousands of these subscribers' usernames to Napster. The software company subsequently blocked these members from the service, prompting some backlash against both the bands and Napster itself.

"A ruling in the RIAA's favor would affect far more than the hundreds of thousands of Napster users blocked as a result of Metallica's and Dr. Dre's actions. If successfully implemented, it would remove one of the key reasons that many Napster aficionados had used the service, even if illegally: to win access to a library of free songs far larger than any other comparable service.

The move could also be technically difficult to implement. The labels could follow Metallica's lead and collect information on individuals who were making their artists' songs available through the service. But with thousands of different artists, and potentially millions of Napster users, this could turn into a logistical nightmare."